About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
authorities say he does not need to be read his miranda rights. >> right. first of all, let's just remember he may be in no physical condition to answer questions with or without miranda warnings. so his physical condition is the great unknown here which may render this whole dispute about miranda moot. let's assume that he is in a condition to answer questions. usually when someone is arrested, they get miranda warnings, and then they is a choice of whether to answer questions or not. here the government has said when there is an imminent danger to public safety, they can question without miranda warnings. that has traditionally or usually been interpreted to mean a future danger to public safety. the so-called ticking time bomb. tell us what's going to happen in the future, and we're not going to worry about miranda. what makes this an unusual invocation of the public safety exception is that the government is saying there is no more danger. there is no further conspirator out there. the government's position may be somewhat internally contradictory. that's something to keep an eye on as thi
of public safety exception before you give him his miranda rights, all that talk of naming him as an enemy combatant, all of that is moot right now. they've gone forward with the official proceedings. >> well, they may have used the public safety exception, and apparently they were using it to question him, and he responded in some way given his medical condition. but certainly now that he has a lawyer, that period, however long it was, is over. and you're right, the enemy combatant thing was a nonstarter from the never going to happen. this is a criminal case in federal court in massachusetts, and that's where it will stay until it's resolved one way or another. >> it's going to take a while. thanks very much, jeffrey. much more on what's going on in this boston investigation coming up here in "the situation room" 0. >>> also, another terror plot released today, new information. canadian authorities announcing the arrest of two men believed to be part of a terror plot to attack a passenger train that may have been heading towards the united states, the plot said to have an alleged connect
this suspect, they'll read the miranda rights and all of that. they're going to try to find out if this individual who has now been arrested acted alone as a so-called lone wolf or was part of some broader conspiracy, walk us through what the fbi is about to do. >> sure. well, wolf, they will -- they will take him into custody, they will give him his miranda rights because they want to be sure any statement the individual may make is admissible in court during the prosecution. if the individual agrees to talk, there will be -- they will take a statement and they will also likely confront him with forensic evidence and things that they have learned, photographs, they will ask him to identify how he constructed the bomb, how he knew to construct the bomb, who, if anyone, he worked with, who he communicated with, they'll want to -- they will want to make sure to take when he's arrested any cell phones, blackberries, pocket litter, pieces of paper, notebooks he may have on him and they'll want to have him retrace for them his steps. they will then send other investigators out to try
dzhokhar tsarnaev to investigators, we do not know if that was before or after he received his miranda warnings or before or after he obtained counsel. that's an excellent point. one of the things we do know that he is saying apparently is that it was his brother tamerlan who was the mastermind here. is that something that could be helpful to his defense if he was merely following his brother? >> well, it will be helpful to his defense in the sense of mitigating the penalty that he might end up suffering. from what i've read and what i've seen, he's clearly as culpable as his brother. the videos that they picked up, and the statements that he made to the driver of the suv, all would indicate that he was a willing participant in this crime, and also the fact that he fled from the scene would further indicate his willingness to participate in this crime. however, any influence that he might have suffered from his brother, his brother's influence on him, may again go to mitigate any penalty that might be imposed upon him. whether he ends up getting the death penalty or whether he ends up
to answer this first, chris. let's talk about miranda here and the fact that his rights have not been read to him. what do you make of that? will that be an issue going forward in this particular case? >> you know, it depends. first, i don't know -- we don't know if he's said anything. if he hasn't made any statements at all, the fact that he didn't get his miranda rights read is not going to be an a relevant issue. if he's made statements i think what the government is doing in expanding that public safety exception beyond the immediacy of the act i think is something that will be taken up, and it will have to be looked at maybe by the u.s. supreme court who just last week heard oral argument in the case from houston that was asking the question when does the fifth amendment or when does your right to remain silent gyp, and so we're already looking at these issues. this is an expansion i think that expands the public safety exception. i think some court is going to have to look at that. >> thank you very much. it's been almost a week now since this city was terrorized, and it's seemingly
are told he had not been given his miranda rights. do you have any sense of whether he has this morning or how soon it will be before he does receive them? >> the -- the decision not to read miranda rights was made by the federal officials. this is a unique clause to the terrorism law that we've not dealt with at the local level before. so, we are standing by and watching that at this point in time to see how that develops. but, the lawyers are involved in the decision, and certainly we're very anxious to talk to him, and the investigators will be doing that as soon as possible. >> commissioner over the weekend i heard you say you believe you found evidence your offices did you believe that these brothers were planning some kind of another attack, or at least prepared for it. tell us about that. >> the two suspects were armed with handguns at the scene of the shoot-out. and there were multiple explosive devices, including a large one that was similar to the pressure cooker device that was found on boylston street. i saw that with my own eyes. i believe that the only reason that someone
, an arrest, miranda rights being processed, these can all mean different things to different people in the cloud of this. but i am told by a boston law enforcement source that they believe that they have the suspect. >> with anderson cooper here now, word of an arrest here and the boston marathon attacks. we have heard the u.s. federal marshals have taken the suspect to the courthouse that would be obvious procedure in a federal investigation. we believe it all started with videotape they were analyzing from a store across the street from the second explosion, we believe it was a lord & taylor, a man was identified, putting down something that officials believe proximated the type of bag that was holding what they thought was an explosive device in one of these that we have been showing you all morning. one of these pressure cookers. and they found him. we're not exactly sure. we don't know what the procedure was, what they cross referenced to find this particular individual. juliette and john said may have been a known person, but now in custody. >> it wasn't just the one video, we
. just to confirm, this -- dzhokhar tsarnaev has not yet been read his miranda rights, correct? >> i have to say i don't know. because there was an initial appearance today, that's why this complaint is out. the circuit executive, the administrator of this area, has put out a statement saying there was an initial appearance before a magistrate judge. that is as far as i understand it an arraignment. i have never heard of an arraignment without an attorney present. they didn't mention an attorney present. if an attorney is present, the attorney will simply say to the client, you -- don't answer questions. at that point, the attorney is the person the prosecutor is supposed to deal with. i have to say, there is information out there that we don't have. whether an attorney was present, whether this was an actual arraignment, i think we just need to hold off on that until we get more information. >> we're holding off. still so early this all happened. >> before we let deb feyerick go and chase down that lead she was referring to, deb, i was wondering, is there anything else that stands out in
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)